If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Welcome to the Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association Forum, we hope you like what you find here and we strongly encourage you to register for an account with us, especially if you are from Pennsylvania. Once registered you will have access to participate in our community. Thanks for visiting and we hope you become a regular!

Re: Interesting Test Case on 2A Rights

From the Government:
Family Immigration

A lawful permanent resident is a foreign national who has been granted the privilege of permanently living and working in the United States. If you want to become a lawful permanent resident based on the fact that you have a relative who is a citizen of the United States or is a lawful permanent resident, your relative in the United States will need to sponsor you and prove he/she has enough income or assets to support you, the intending immigrant(s) when in the United States.For an overview of the types of immigrant visas available under immigration law, please see Visa Types for Immigrants. Your relative sponsor and you, the intending immigrant, must successfully complete certain steps in the immigration process in order to come to the United States. Here are the key steps:
First, the USCIS must approve an immigrant visa petition, I-130 Petition for Alien Relative filed by your sponsoring relative for you. Next, most sponsors will need to demonstrate adequate income or assets to support the intending immigrant, and accept legal responsibility for financially supporting their family member, by completing and signing a document called an Affidavit of Support. Once this is complete, then the intending immigrant will apply for the immigrant visa.

Re: Interesting Test Case on 2A Rights

Originally Posted by ideaman

From the Government:
Family Immigration

A lawful permanent resident is a foreign national who has been granted the privilege of permanently living and working in the United States. If you want to become a lawful permanent resident based on the fact that you have a relative who is a citizen of the United States or is a lawful permanent resident, your relative in the United States will need to sponsor you and prove he/she has enough income or assets to support you, the intending immigrant(s) when in the United States.For an overview of the types of immigrant visas available under immigration law, please see Visa Types for Immigrants. Your relative sponsor and you, the intending immigrant, must successfully complete certain steps in the immigration process in order to come to the United States. Here are the key steps:
First, the USCIS must approve an immigrant visa petition, I-130 Petition for Alien Relative filed by your sponsoring relative for you. Next, most sponsors will need to demonstrate adequate income or assets to support the intending immigrant, and accept legal responsibility for financially supporting their family member, by completing and signing a document called an Affidavit of Support. Once this is complete, then the intending immigrant will apply for the immigrant visa.

I stand corrected, though note the inherent contradictions in the definition directly from the source.

Any person not a citizen of the United States who is living in the U.S. under legally recognized and lawfully recorded permanent residence as an immigrant. Also known as “permanent resident alien,” “resident alien permit holder,” and “Green Card holder.”

Permanent residents are also commonly referred to as immigrants; however, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) broadly defines an immigrant as any alien in the United States, except one legally admitted under specific nonimmigrant categories (INA section 101(a)(15)). An illegal alien who entered the United States without inspection, for example, would be strictly defined as an immigrant under the INA but is not a permanent resident alien. Lawful permanent residents are legally accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the United States. They may be issued immigrant visas by the Department of State overseas or adjusted to permanent resident status by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in the United States.

Re: Interesting Test Case on 2A Rights

1. People have the right to defend themselves from attack. If it is shown that he was legitimately defending himself, then he should not be charged with murder.

2. Is there a law against illegal aliens having guns? If there is then he should be charged. If there is not a law then he should not. We have a defined set of laws. We can not make up laws out of the air to charge people with whether citizens or not.

3. If there is no law against illegal aliens having guns, then how did he get the gun? Did he get it legally? If he got the gun legally then no gun charge. If he got gun illegally then gun charge.

4. Any laws that apply to citizens apply. I have read a ton of cases over the last 2 years where citizens who were breaking some law or another used a gun to defend themself, were found to be legitimately defending themself, and were charged with other related crimes.

5. Honestly he is an illegal alien, he broke the law entering the country. If he did not break any gun laws that is not the end. I am a big proponent of legal immigrants. I can not advocate for people who break the law to enter the country however. What ever penalties are applicable to his illegal status including deportation should be implemented.

Re: Interesting Test Case on 2A Rights

Originally Posted by internet troll

1. People have the right to defend themselves from attack. If it is shown that he was legitimately defending himself, then he should not be charged with murder.

2. Is there a law against illegal aliens having guns? If there is then he should be charged. If there is not a law then he should not. We have a defined set of laws. We can not make up laws out of the air to charge people with whether citizens or not.

3. If there is no law against illegal aliens having guns, then how did he get the gun? Did he get it legally? If he got the gun legally then no gun charge. If he got gun illegally then gun charge.

4. Any laws that apply to citizens apply. I have read a ton of cases over the last 2 years where citizens who were breaking some law or another used a gun to defend themself, were found to be legitimately defending themself, and were charged with other related crimes.

5. Honestly he is an illegal alien, he broke the law entering the country. If he did not break any gun laws that is not the end. I am a big proponent of legal immigrants. I can not advocate for people who break the law to enter the country however. What ever penalties are applicable to his illegal status including deportation should be implemented.

Re#2: It is unlawful for an illegal alien to own a gun according to the Gun Control Act of 1968
This was upheld in 2012 and the defendant vowed to take it to the Supreme Court. So the test case has already been decided.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...8471BP20120508
The case involves a Mexican who came here when he was 3 and had a shotgun and pistol in his Wyoming home. He did not even shoot anyone.

Re #3: It does not matter if a citizen, legal resident or illegal alien came by the gun legally or illegally, simply having a gun in your possession without a permit in NYC is a crime.

Re: Interesting Test Case on 2A Rights

Re #3: It does not matter if a citizen, legal resident or illegal alien came by the gun legally or illegally, simply having a gun in your possession without a permit in NYC is a crime.

And there is the answer.

From the article:

Perez and his attorney said he has a Second Amendment right to carry a gun even though he is in the U.S. illegally, telling the New York Daily News:

“The Framers were clear: If they meant citizens, they would have said citizens. But they didn’t,” his defense lawyer, Samuel Jacobson, argued in Brooklyn federal court. “There is no suggestion that there was a concept of ‘illegal alien’ and no suggestion that if you were from a foreign country, you couldn’t bear arms.”

He is being charged with a law a citizen would be charged with. Why is there even an argument? Unless this somehow miraculously overturn the law for everyone, he should be charged and the lawyer is wasting everyone’s time.

Re: Interesting Test Case on 2A Rights

Originally Posted by marinville

Non US citizens do not have US constitutional protections. You can argue that they have natural rights, but the US constitution still only applies to American citizens.

The problem with this argument is that the Constitution does not establish those "protections"; it only enumerates or calls them out. Generally, the Constitution spells out only the limited and specific powers yielded to government by the people. Thus the Bill of Rights is like a list of the most important examples of innate rights beyond government.

It is you. You have all the weapons that you need. Now fight. --Sucker Punch